From ML Predictions to Informed Diagnostic Assistance Using the Toulmin Model of Argumentation

When asked to describe a medical image that was never attached, frontier vision-language models do not abstain: they confabulate a diagnosis. We show that this confabulation is not random. It is structured by who the patient is said to be. Across chest X-ray, brain MRI, and dermatology, Claude Opus-4.7, GPT-5.4, and Gemini-3.1-Pro are each queried with only a demographic descriptor and no image, and changing the descriptor systematically shifts the diagnosis returned. Claude concentrates sharply: a 65-year-old white man asking about a skin mole receives Melanoma in nearly every response, and a 32-year-old Black woman asking about her chest X-ray receives a Sarcoidosis diagnosis whose reasoning reads "suspected, based on demographics and classic pattern.'' GPT-5.4's effect is broader, fabricating across every demographic cell we test, most conspicuously naming Sarcoidosis for young Black patients on chest X-ray. Two structural findings sharpen the problem. A hedged regime appears in which the prose acknowledges the missing image while the structured diagnosis field nevertheless names a disease, a dissociation invisible to prose-only audits. And Claude's dermatology effect collapses entirely when 'skin mole' is swapped for 'skin lesion' while GPT-5.4's is preserved, indicating that mirage is a family of distinct failure modes rather than a single phenomenon. Trustworthy VLM deployment in clinical pipelines requires auditing the structured output channel directly, and probe-word sensitivity should be treated as a first-class evaluation dimension

Despite strong performance of deep learning models in retinal disease detection, most systems produce static predictions without clinical reasoning or interactive explanation. Recent advances in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) integrate diagnostic predictions with clinically meaningful dialogue to support clinical decision-making and patient counseling. In this study, OcularChat, an MLLM, was fine-tuned from Qwen2.5-VL using simulated patient-physician dialogues to diagnose age-related macular degeneration (AMD) through visual question answering on color fundus photographs (CFPs). A total of 705,850 simulated dialogues paired with 46,167 CFPs were generated to train OcularChat to identify key AMD features and produce reasoned predictions. OcularChat demonstrated strong classification performance in AREDS, achieving accuracies of 0.954, 0.849, and 0.678 for the three diagnostic tasks: advanced AMD, pigmentary abnormalities, and drusen size, significantly outperforming existing MLLMs. On AREDS2, OcularChat remained the top-performing method on all tasks. Across three independent ophthalmologist graders, OcularChat achieved higher mean scores than a strong baseline model for advanced AMD (3.503 vs. 2.833), pigmentary abnormalities (3.272 vs. 2.828), drusen size (3.064 vs. 2.433), and overall impression (2.978 vs. 2.464) on a 5-point clinical grading rubric. Beyond strong objective performance in AMD severity classification, OcularChat demonstrated the ability to provide diagnostic reasoning, clinically relevant explanations, and interactive dialogue, with high performance in subjective ophthalmologist evaluation. These findings suggest that MLLMs may enable accurate, interpretable, and clinically useful image-based diagnosis and classification of AMD.

Large language models (LLMs) show promise in medical diagnosis, but real-world deployment remains challenging due to high-stakes clinical decisions and imperfect reasoning reliability. As a result, careful inspection of model behavior is essential for assessing whether diagnostic reasoning is reliable and clinically grounded. However, debugging medical LLMs remains difficult. First, developers often lack sufficient medical domain expertise to interpret model errors in clinically meaningful terms. Second, models can fail across a large and diverse set of instances involving different input types, tasks, and reasoning steps, making it challenging for developers to prioritize which errors deserve focused inspection. Third, developers struggle to identify recurring error patterns across cases, as existing debugging practices are largely instance-centric and rely on manual inspection of isolated failures. To address these challenges, we present VeriLLMed, a visual analytics system that integrates external biomedical knowledge to audit and debug medical LLM diagnostic reasoning. VeriLLMed transforms model outputs into comparable reasoning paths, constructs knowledge graph-grounded reference paths, and identifies three recurring classes of diagnosis errors: relation errors, branch errors, and missing errors. Case studies and expert evaluation demonstrate that VeriLLMed helps developers identify clinically implausible reasoning and generate actionable insights that can inform the improvement of medical LLMs.